Perplexity AI asks Ninth Circuit to allow shopping tool on Amazon

SEATTLE (CN) — A Ninth Circuit panel heard arguments Thursday over whether to block a preliminary injunction restricting the use of an artificial intelligence shopping tool that helps users navigate Amazon’s platform.

Software company Perplexity argued it did not enter Amazon’s computer systems through its AI-powered shopping assistant but instead developed a browser that allows an AI agent to access Amazon on a user’s behalf.

“Amazon seeks to stretch criminal statutes that prohibit computer hacking to sue Perplexity simply because Amazon wanted its own customers to access its website its preferred way,” Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan attorney Chris Michel said, representing Perplexity.

The appeal comes after Senior U.S. District Judge Maxine Chesney of San Francisco ruled in March that Amazon is likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that Perplexity’s Comet application violates the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California’s Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act. Chesney granted a preliminary injunction.

“Amazon has provided strong evidence that Perplexity, through its Comet browser, accesses with the Amazon user’s permission, but without authorization by Amazon, the user’s password-protected account, thereby obtaining information as to the user’s private Amazon account information," the Bill Clinton appointee wrote. “That such information is transmitted to Perplexity’s servers for the purpose of conducting said user’s requested tasks.”

Although the injunction was stayed pending the appeal, Amazon told the three-judge panel at the William Kenzo Nakamura United States Courthouse in Seattle the injunction is crucial because Comet’s AI agent causes technological harm when it collects data.

Amazon attorney Hagan Scotten of Hueten Hennigan said Perplexity’s access to user data is novel and unlike that of other companies.

“The evidence is undisputed that its competitors, which have the same technological capabilities — and I’m referring to Brave and Microsoft Edge — could go into the Amazon store, but they don’t," Scotten said. “If a user says, specifically, ‘Go there,’ … They say, ‘For security reasons, I cannot go there.’“

“They respect the settled rules that are both this court’s rules, the laws and the norms here,” he said.

Amazon sued Perplexity in November. The AI search company was valued at $21 billion as of early 2026.

Amazon says automated AI agents such as Comet that access its online store and private account information on behalf of customers must transparently identify themselves.

Michel argued that Perplexity is not hacking Amazon’s systems and that using Comet is akin to a customer accessing Amazon through Safari or Chrome.

“All of the intent to access Amazon is coming from the user,” Michel said.

Scotten countered that Perplexity’s assistant does far more than a traditional browser.

“Perplexity itself says that it is nothing like these passive browsers,” he said. “What sets Comet apart is its agentic capabilities — the ability to find information and act on it intelligently and autonomously."

One judge expressed concerns about how the rise of AI could shape future litigation.

“This case is difficult in part because we are dealing with a statute from 1986,” said U.S. District Judge John Hinderaker, a Donald Trump appointee sitting by designation. “It’s not really built for these circumstances."

“My concern is that there’s going be unintended consequences that flow from whatever we do here today, and they’re hard to foresee," Hinderaker said.

In rebuttal, Michel argued that keeping the preliminary injunction in place would hinder innovation and competition.

“Given the unintended consequences and ambiguities, this court should allow the litigation to play out, rather than the harsh remedy of a preliminary injunction,” he said.

U.S. Circuit Judge Milan Smith Jr., a George W. Bush appointee, and U.S. Circuit Judge Eric Tung, a Donald Trump appointee, rounded out the panel.